Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Partc Spp Apr topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

SICC approves Kansas Part C State Performance Plan annual report; author abstains

2246962 · January 14, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The State Interagency Coordinating Council voted to approve Kansas’ Part C State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report after staff presented statewide indicator data and compliance findings.

The State Interagency Coordinating Council voted to approve Kansas’ Part C State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report (SPP/APR) for federal fiscal year 2023 (state fiscal year 2024) after staff reviewed statewide outcomes and compliance indicators.

Trisha, the state program presenter, told members the report covered “federal fiscal year 2023, which is state fiscal year 2024, which runs from 07/01/2023 to 06/30/2024.” She said the document will be adjusted slightly in the introduction to reflect federal technical assistance feedback before submission and that the changes “won’t be substantive.”

Why it matters: the SPP/APR is the state’s formal report to the U.S. Department of Education and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services on Part C early intervention program performance. Approval by SICC is required before the state submits final documents to federal partners.

Key findings presented

- Timely provision of services (Indicator 1): Trisha reported Kansas met the compliance target at 100 percent for services delivered within 30 days of IFSP signatures. “This is a compliance indicator, so it's required to be set at a %,” she said.

- Services in natural environments (Indicator 2): Kansas exceeded the usual ceiling for this indicator and reported 99.86 percent.

- Early childhood outcomes (Indicator 3): Trisha summarized progress across the three outcome areas (social-emotional, acquisition/use of knowledge and skills, and behaviors to meet needs). She reported meeting targets for several subparts but noted ongoing failure to meet the target for Indicator 3C‑2 (use of appropriate behaviors to meet needs): “This 3c2 is one that we have not met target for many years in a row. We're looking into why that might be.”

- Parent surveys (Indicator 4): survey return rate increased from 9 percent to 19.8 percent, and the state added race/ethnicity and geographic reporting to better understand representativeness. Trisha said urban and Hispanic families were underrepresented in survey returns compared with rural and white families.

- Child‑find indicators (Indicators 5 and 6): Kansas did not meet the target for the 0–1 age cohort (Indicator 5), reporting 2.02 percent served against a target of 2.2 percent, but exceeded target for the broader 0–3 population (Indicator 6) at 5.38 percent.

- Transition indicators (Indicator 8 a/b/c): Kansas reported high compliance rates (about 98–99 percent) for transition planning and notification at least 90 days before a child turns 3.

- New indicators: Trisha described the state’s first-year reporting on Indicator 12, which tracks instances of noncompliance not corrected within a year. She summarized the federal expectation and said Kansas reported 0 percent for the first submission because its noncompliance numbers are low and correction procedures were completed within the required timeframes.

Action and vote

SICC member Susan Boldt moved to approve the SPP/APR; Courtney Hockman seconded. The motion carried on a voice vote. Trisha noted while she had prepared the report she would abstain from the vote: “since I wrote the report, I am abstaining.” The meeting record did not include a roll-call tally of named yes/no votes.

What comes next

Trisha said she would incorporate minor introduction wording changes suggested by federal technical assistance before formally submitting the report to federal partners at the end of the month. She also said the state team will continue drilling into Indicator 3C data to better understand program-to-program variation and discipline-based differences in initial scoring practices.

Sources and evidence

The findings above are drawn from the SPP/APR presentation and discussion recorded in the meeting transcript, including Trisha’s presentation of indicators and the motion to approve by SICC members.

Ending: The council approved the state’s Part C SPP/APR and directed staff to submit the finalized, non‑substantive edits to federal partners; the report will be updated and filed after those clarifications are incorporated.